Ilusion or Delusion

 Illusion or Delusion

First, let's define illusion. Some consider illusion either perceptual distortion or a cognitive misjudgment, distinct from language. The intervening issue is delusion, or false belief, with origins at many points, eg socialization, conditioning, ideology, misinformed, etc.

Reality as in foundational metaphysics is a complex set of structures which must be inferred or performed, not exactly visible or legible.  Reality is a set of structures, a material reality! The illusions are distortions of perceptions, like illusions of distance, of background, of intensity. 

Illusion and delusion is the confused pair. Reality may be misperceived or misjudged due to either illusion or delusion, but delusion is by far the more serious issue in psychoanalysis!

Delusion means false, illusion means distortion. Freud has a discussion on this distinction.

The problem of epistemology, how we know, and metaphysics, what we know as reality,  is that each person has a different ontology, what or whether something exists, based on experience, however there are various limits that constitute reality in terms of economics, biology, law, social relations, etc. Reality surely has a foundational metaphysics in terms of nutrition, safety, shelter/housing, financial security/jobs, etc. 

To assert that ontology is merely political rhetoric, deniable, irrelevant to ecological and evolutionary requirements for human life, then you are not dealing with illusions, but with delusions!

One question concerns whether an hallucination is an illusion or a delusion!

One definition of “hallucination” is that it is a construction, a personal subjective determination of the existence or value of a sensation/image/emotion/experience, etc. Hallucination, however, is often considered to be a illusion because the person cannot determine the source or origin of the sender, it is 'anonymous!'  

Constructionism is somewhat disingenuous because most people learn the theories, or by experience, that regulate risk taking and thus improve evolutionary fitness. However, the notion that fitness is an individual determination or construction is not really accurate. How does that explain polygamy, altruism, and mate competition with its incidences of jealousy, rape, murder and violence generally?

Perception is not necessarily caused by maximizing fitness - there are limits. Firstly, organisms must survive before fitness is “maximized!” Secondly, fitness involves offspring also reproducing, therefore surviving, thus the perceptual “adaptations” at issue are more than fitness concerns. In fact, the issues and concerns are so complex that fitness like survival becomes a probability (which might be why some people revert to Quantum Physics instead of focusing on causality). Thirdly, if perception is adapted for anything, it is adapted to detect danger. Perception that is illusory or constructed or hallucinated will be unlikely to pass this test. If danger is constructed and not objectively perceived, why should fitness work - it is possible that failure is more probable than success, however!